Evaluation of the Regulation 258/2012 of 14 March 2012 implementing Article 10 of the United Nations’ Protocol against the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, their parts and components and ammunition, and establishing export authorisation, and import and transit measures for firearms, their parts and components and ammunition (since this is an evaluation it has a roadmap - but it is not a major item)
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: area of freedom, security and justice



IMMC.Ares%282017%291071481.ENG.xhtml.PART-2017-51656V1.docx













EVALUATION AND FITNESS CHECK (FC) ROADMAP






title of the evaluation/fc




Evaluation of the Regulation on export, import and transit licensing or authorisation systems of firearms






lead dg – responsible unit




HOME – D2




date of  this roadmap




March 2017






type of evaluation





Evaluation 


Final, Ex-post 


Mixed




planned start date


planned completion date




Q1 / 2017



Q3-4 / 2017 












Planning calendar




http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/evaluation/index_en.htm






This indicative roadmap is provided for information purposes only and is subject to change.










A. Purpose  






(A.1) Purpose 






The purpose of the evaluation is to provide the Commission with a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the implementation/application of Regulation 258/2012 and to make recommendations for possible further improvements. The Commission will report on the evaluation findings to the European Parliament and the Council which may include proposals for amending the Regulation.






(A.2) Justification






Article 21(3) of the Regulation 258/2012 provides that "the Commission shall review the implementation of this Regulation and present a report to the European Parliament and the Council on its application, which may include proposals for its amendment" by 19 April 2017. 













B. Content and subject of the evaluation






(B.1) Subject area






The subject of the evaluation is Regulation 258/2012 adopted by the Parliament and Council on 14 March 2012. This Regulation implements Article 10 of the UN Firearms Protocol, and establishes export authorisation, and import and transit measures for firearms, their parts and components and ammunition.


 


This Regulation is part of an overall legal and operational framework aiming to prevent, detect, investigation and prosecute firearms trafficking.



The Regulation addresses the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, their parts and components and ammunition. It applies only to firearms, their parts and essential components and ammunition for civilian use and not to those intended specifically for military purposes. Furthermore, it only addresses trade with and transfers from or to third countries. It does not concern possession, acquisition or transfers within the Union, which is governed by Firearms Directive
1
, which has been recently evaluated and is subject to a proposal for revision
2
. 



Regulation 258/2012 is based on the principle that firearms and related items should not be transferred between states without the knowledge and consent of all states involved. It lays down procedural rules for export, and import - as well as for transit of firearms, their parts and components and ammunition. 








(B.2) Original objectives of the intervention






A key prevention objective of the Regulation is improving firearms tracing - from manufacturer to last legal purchaser. Preventing firearms trafficking includes monitoring legal transfers of firearms, stepping up controls and enhancing cooperation between EU national authorities.








(B.3) How the objectives were to be achieved






Based on the Regulation, exports of firearms are subject to export authorisations, containing the necessary information to trace them, including the country of origin, the country of export, the final recipient and a description of the quantity of the firearms and related items. 



Member States have the obligation to verify that the importing third country has issued an import authorisation. In the case of transit of weapons and related items through third countries, each transit country must give notice in writing that it has no objection. Member States must refuse to grant an export authorisation if the person applying has any previous record concerning illicit trafficking or other serious crime.













C. Scope of the evaluation/FC






(C.1) Topics covered






The evaluation will cover all aspects of the Regulation. This includes an evaluation of the implementation and application of the Regulation in every EU Member States. It will not duplicate aspects assessed in the evaluation conducted to prepare for the draft Directive amending the 91/477/EEC Weapons Directive, but will take due account of any relevant findings in order to ensure coherence.






(C.2) Issues to be examined






The evaluation will address both quantitative and qualitative aspects and should provide clear answers to the following questions.



Definition:


To what extent are the definitions contained in the Regulation under article 2 and not previously evaluated in Firearms Directive still deemed accurate and fit for purpose? 



Relevance:


To what extent do the objectives and scope of the Regulation correspond to the needs and risks defined in current security context?



European added value:


To what extent has the Regulation achieved EU-added value as opposed to what could have been achieved under national/international legislation? 


To what extent could the EU added-value be improved?



Effectiveness:


To what extent has the Regulation achieved its objectives and in particular what has been its contribution with regard to the security of persons and businesses and to an efficiently operating internal market for firearms?



Efficiency:


Are the results achieved at a reasonable cost? In particular is the administrative burden created by the implementation of the Regulation's concepts and procedures for national authorities, industry and citizens justified/proportionate by its benefits (and, if not, recommend the measures to reduce it)?



Coherence:


To what extent is this intervention coherent with other interventions (Community/Member States/ international) which have similar objectives?



Complementarity:


To what extent has the Regulation proved complementary to other (Community/Member States/international) interventions/initiatives in the field?



Sustainability:


Are the effects likely to last after the intervention ends?






(C.3) Other tasks






The evaluation will also provide, where appropriate, a set of recommendations for any subsequent action.













D. Evidence base






(D.1) Evidence from monitoring 






See D.3 and E






(D.2) Previous evaluations and other reports






The Regulation was adopted in 2012, this will be its first evaluation. It will take into account relevant findings of the 2014 evaluation of the 91/477/EEC Weapons Directive to ensure coherence. 






(D.3) Evidence from assessing the implementation and application of legislation  (complaints, infringement procedures)






- Art.7 of the Regulation requests a verification of import and, eventually, transit authorisation before issuing an export authorisation. Some Member States seem to be applying Common Position 2008/944/CFSP to the export of all kind of weapons -aimed at both military and civilian use-, instead of the Regulation (EU) No 258/2012 (concerning civil use).






(D.4) Consultation






An internet based public consultation will be carried out between Q1 and Q2 2017 for 12 weeks, open to all interested parties (competent national authorities, firearms industry sector and consumers) to provide their input. 



In addition, the Commission will contract an external study to support the evaluation. The study will include consultations with relevant parties in order to get quantitative and qualitative data from across the EU. 






(D.5) Further evidence to be gathered






Particular consideration will be given to the following issues when assessing the evaluation questions described under C.2:



Definitions: 


The following questions as regards definitions (article 2) will be covered: 


Is the scope of the Regulation clear, or are there diverging interpretations within Member States?


To what extent have the definitions of key terms of the Regulation been introduced in national transposition laws and measures? 


To what extent do Member States apply diverging definitions which might affect the objectives of the Regulation?



Export procedures:


As regards export procedure, Art.7 of the Regulation requests a verification of import and, eventually, transit authorisation before issuing an export authorisation. The following questions on this aspect will be asked:


Does this procedure cause shortcoming? Member States may decide to apply a silent consent in the case of transit authorisation. Are these provisions applied by all Member States? Has it caused any problems?



Interface with Common Position 2008/344/CFSP:


Some Member States seem to be applying Common Position 2008/944/CFSP to the export of all kind of weapons -aimed at both military and civilian use-, although article 4(2) of Regulation (EU) No 258/2012 cannot be interpreted in a way as to apply the provisions of Common Position 2008/944/CFSP to weapons which are not covered by the latter. Article 4(2) of Regulation (EU) No 258/2012 only lays down the possibility for Member States to apply a single procedure to carry out the obligations imposed on them by the said two different instruments, but neither that provision nor any other in that instrument can be used in such a way as to impose the substantive regime of Common Position 2008/944/CFSP to items other than those included in EU Common Military List. The evaluation will seek an answer to the following questions: How are these two different regimes applied in the Member States? To what extent is there a risk that the two regimes are mixed up in issuing the authorisation for the export of firearms, and with what consequences?



Fees for internal transits:


In some Member States the crossing of its own territory for goods coming from another EU Member States and destined to be exported to third countries (internal transits) are subject to a fee. The evaluation will address the question to what extent the existence of a fee and the administrative procedure for collecting such fees hampers the cross-border activities?



Simplified procedures:


Are simplified procedures correctly implemented? Can any significant problem in the application of those procedures be stressed?



European firearms pass:


According to feedback from Member States the European firearms pass provision does not seem to work properly with respect to imports/exports. What are the reasons? Is the balance between the effectiveness of current harmonisation of procedures and the burden on MS and other stakeholders satisfactory or is there room for improvement? Article 9 of the Regulations provides that hunters and marksmen can transfer their weapons to Third Countries provided that they are in possession of a European firearms pass. Does this derogation affect public order or security? If so, how such negative effects can be reduced or eliminated?



Categories:


Is there a need for a clearer distinction between different categories and in particular between category A (military firearms) and other categories of firearms, as well as between firearms for hunting and sport shooting versus other firearms?



Information sharing:


According to Member States authorities and stakeholders, the lack of information sharing and communication is a major concern in combatting illicit firearms trade with third countries. Do they use different databases than for intra-EU transfers? Do Member States authorities have the means to collect and store related information on exporters and consignees? If this information is or can be collected, has it been disseminated or shared and how? Are there initiatives taken to interconnect such national repositories between themselves and with national registers used for intra-EU transfers? Such analysis is to be made taking into account the recent Directive proposal which introduces a system of exchange of information among Member States and requires dealers and brokers to be connected to central firearm registers and its underlying evaluation studies. 
























(1)
 Directive 2008/51/EC of 21 May 2008 on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons



(2)
 See COM(2015)751 final of 18.11.2015; "Report from the Commission to the European parliament and the Council – evaluation of Council Directive 91/477/EC of 18 June 1991, as amended by Directive 2008/51/EC of 21 May 2008 on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons".